3 ms·

> The fact that "LGBT consumers may be able to obtain wedding-website design services from other businesses" is irrelevant. "The product at issue is not merely

> The fact that "LGBT consumers may be able to obtain wedding-website design services from other businesses" is irrelevant. "The product at issue is not merely 'custom-made wedding websites,' but rather 'custom-made wedding websites of the same quality and nature as those made by Appellants.' In that market, only Appellants exist." What? This argument makes no sense. By this logic, every service ever can be compelled to do anything, because by definition they are the only one creating something of that quality and nature.

smorgusofborg 5y ago
> By this logic, every service ever can be compelled to do anything, because by definition they are the only one creating something of that quality and nature. Only in the context of civil rights discrimination, which is very established for publicly traded companies, but I'm not so sure about smaller business. I had neighbors who were unable to buy houses through a real estate agent in the 1970s because they were black, I am not sure what was and wasn't illegal in the discrimination given the weird rules for private people, clubs, etc, but if I remember correctly a realtor from a large concern (Coldwell Banker?) ultimately gave them service.
- AllegedAlec 5y ago
  > context of civil rights discrimination Why is someone not wanting to build a website a civil rights violation? What civil right is being violated?
  - smorgusofborg 5y ago
    If you don't make any promises you can generally do whatever you want with whatever discretion as a generic website maker. They asked if they can specifically make wedding a service while having a religious belief that causes them to discriminate on basis of sexual orientation. They can't and we wouldn't be able to compel anyone with their beliefs to be in that business, but we don't have to adjust that business for people who hold their religious beliefs.
lupire 5y ago
That's the key error in the ruling. It's sort of correct in the narrows but it ignores the idea that the marketplace is a set overlapping and partially nested industries of increasing specificity, not a discrete collection of separate markets, which would force the reductio ad absurdum that majority reached but accepted as a valid conclusion.

smorgusofborg 5y ago

> By this logic, every service ever can be compelled to do anything, because by definition they are the only one creating something of that quality and nature. Only in the context of civil rights discrimination, which is very established for publicly traded companies, but I'm not so sure about smaller business. I had neighbors who were unable to buy houses through a real estate agent in the 1970s because they were black, I am not sure what was and wasn't illegal in the discrimination given the weird rules for private people, clubs, etc, but if I remember correctly a realtor from a large concern (Coldwell Banker?) ultimately gave them service.

AllegedAlec 5y ago
> context of civil rights discrimination Why is someone not wanting to build a website a civil rights violation? What civil right is being violated?
- smorgusofborg 5y ago
  If you don't make any promises you can generally do whatever you want with whatever discretion as a generic website maker. They asked if they can specifically make wedding a service while having a religious belief that causes them to discriminate on basis of sexual orientation. They can't and we wouldn't be able to compel anyone with their beliefs to be in that business, but we don't have to adjust that business for people who hold their religious beliefs.

lupire 5y ago

That's the key error in the ruling. It's sort of correct in the narrows but it ignores the idea that the marketplace is a set overlapping and partially nested industries of increasing specificity, not a discrete collection of separate markets, which would force the reductio ad absurdum that majority reached but accepted as a valid conclusion.